If you want more people in Open, the best way to accomplish it are QOL features to make Open more desirable.

[Rubbernuke]

...which is why I suggested this entire concept in the first place.

The reason Open isn't used by many people is for the exact reasons you lay out. These are not perks, these are critical design flaws that hold it back from being what it could be.

Changing them is the best way of helping Open become a more thriving and vibrant community.

The people don't use open because they don't like being attacked. If you want Open to appeal to these people, you need to have better C + P so they feel 'safer'. You can have as many comms tools as you like in the end, they'll still only appeal to those already in open.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

I cant be bothered to run the hamster mill to not be the easiest meat. Open died with the engineer arms race.
It's unfair, it's unbalanced, it is one-dimensionally skewed in favour of gear, it's a sure way to waste your time, lose progress and get frustrated. In other words: It's no game anymore.

 

[DemiserofD]

The people don't use open because they don't like being attacked. If you want Open to appeal to these people, you need to have better C + P so they feel 'safer'. You can have as many comms tools as you like in the end, they'll still only appeal to those already in open.

I disagree. People don't like being attacked, true, but what people truly dislike is having to look on everyone they encounter with suspicion. That creates an unwelcoming game environment that's more stressful than it's worth.

Crucially, this has nothing to do with actually being attacked. It's the stress of a potential attack that's much, much worse.

If the main perk of being in Open is meeting new people, but you're afraid of everyone you see, then it's quite easy to see that Open has no benefits at all.

Which is why social aspects are so critically important. By allowing players to vet those they encounter before they meet, by facilitating positive interactions with other players, you're able to bypass this stress that makes playing with others undesirable, and lets people more easily use the positive aspects of Open play.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I disagree. People don't like being attacked, true, but what people truly dislike is having to look on everyone they encounter with suspicion. That creates an unwelcoming game environment that's more stressful than it's worth.

And you think someone attacking is going to either spend the time talking or telling the truth? People who hate Open will still view it the same.

Crucially, this has nothing to do with actually being attacked. It's the stress of a potential attack that's much, much worse.

Being able to chat stops that how? How would it stop someone simply lying to someone and messing up their game? It makes no odds to me, but to a lot of people it would simply make people distrust more since you can pull more elaborate stunts on people.

If the main perk of being in Open is meeting new people, but you're afraid of everyone you see, then it's quite easy to see that Open has no benefits at all.

The main perk in Open is getting by on your skills and ship. Open exists to bring those who fancy themselves against harder opponents. PG is the 'social' mode.

Which is why social aspects are so critically important. By allowing players to vet those they encounter before they meet, by facilitating positive interactions with other players, you're able to bypass this stress that makes playing with others undesirable, and lets people more easily use the positive aspects of Open play.

How would you vet people? People lie, this just makes it even more dangerous for people who don't trust other players to begin with. I'd find it quite funny if I got scammed, but then I'm not bothered about being in Open.

 

[DemiserofD]

The main perk in Open is getting by on your skills and ship. Open exists to bring those who fancy themselves against harder opponents. PG is the 'social' mode.

I'm sorry, but that's just not looking at it on a basic enough level. You're specifying the aspects of meeting new people that you personally enjoy, but they all ultimately boil down to the basic concept of, 'having the potential to meet new people'.

That is the only difference between Open and Solo, and the basis upon which all further enhancement must be focused.

Being able to chat stops that how? How would it stop someone simply lying to someone and messing up their game? It makes no odds to me, but to a lot of people it would simply make people distrust more since you can pull more elaborate stunts on people.

As I specified, it wouldn't be anywhere near just the ability to chat. It includes such features as sharing missions and seeing a history of other players crimes. If you're being invited to a wing mission by a player who, right next to their name, is specified as a 'pirate lord', you'll most likely not trust them. By contrast, if they have no history of prior murders, then you'll be more likely to trust them.

Not to mention the fact that, much of these aspects could be routed through the Powerplay system. If someone in a given Power enjoys ripping off or murdering people in their own Power, they'll be quite likely to be run off by other members of the Power, even if they're not ejected for murdering allies regularly. If that doesn't happen, players could post warnings about them in their Power's message board, and since the player in question would be losing merits by killing their own teammates, they wouldn't be in good enough standing to undo said messages.

And if none of that works, the players could always just leave the power in question for greener pastures.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Tying improved communications between players to Powerplay would, I expect, be ineffective for those players who don't want to paint a target on their back by pledging to a Power - given that some players will attack players of opposing Powers for no other reason.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Well one suggestion both for PG's (especially those allowing PvP) and Open would be adding working convoy mechanism. Say somebody or somebodies needs protection. Someones deeming themselves capable doing that offer their service. Some ship is designated as convoy leader, and on voyage starting point convoy is formed. Controlls of other ships are slaved to leader, and convoy jumps and flies in SC at close formation like one ship. If any of the convoy ships are interdicted whole convoy drops from SC at interdiction point. Any member can always leave convoy. So if anyone not being interdicted takes controlls during interdiction sequence one drops out of convoy and becomes independent again. Any profits of convoyed ships are shared equally automatically.
Okay system can be used malicously, and for that I'd add one other thing, every commander would have permanent reputation in dealings toward other commanders. Say convoy protector failing protection would take reputation hit, and ones repution is shown on commander statistic.

 

[Robert Maynard]

.... and for that I'd add one other thing, every commander would have permanent reputation in dealings toward other commanders.

Extracted to emphasise this point - a CMDR's long term track record in dealings with other CMDRs is entirely lacking in-game. One would have thought that the Pilots' Federation would / should / could keep such records and use them to inform CMDRs when they encounter them (possibly by using a different colour and / or symbol on the scanner as one possible method)....

 

[Rubbernuke]

I'm sorry, but that's just not looking at it on a basic enough level. You're specifying the aspects of meeting new people that you personally enjoy, but they all ultimately boil down to the basic concept of, 'having the potential to meet new people'.

That is the only difference between Open and Solo, and the basis upon which all further enhancement must be focused.

The 'basic level' is that ED is not a talky MMO. Its decentalized opportunistic and ad hoc.

As I specified, it wouldn't be anywhere near just the ability to chat. It includes such features as sharing missions and seeing a history of other players crimes. If you're being invited to a wing mission by a player who, right next to their name, is specified as a 'pirate lord', you'll most likely not trust them. By contrast, if they have no history of prior murders, then you'll be more likely to trust them.

Which, with alts is negated. I like the idea of seeing criminality at 'the source' though (I've had similar ideas in the past)- although there its more about telling the difference between a pirate and those who simply like to kill. But even then this is only useful to people in open. It won't encourage people who don't like being pirated because they don't like being pirated in the first place.

Not to mention the fact that, much of these aspects could be routed through the Powerplay system. If someone in a given Power enjoys ripping off or murdering people in their own Power, they'll be quite likely to be run off by other members of the Power, even if they're not ejected for murdering allies regularly. If that doesn't happen, players could post warnings about them in their Power's message board, and since the player in question would be losing merits by killing their own teammates, they wouldn't be in good enough standing to undo said messages.

And if none of that works, the players could always just leave the power in question for greener pastures.

What you describe is incredibly rare though. 5C is the way it happens, not killing allies.

The problem as it stands in Powerplay is that you can't be decoupled like that- it requires Powerplay to be updated and frankly this would be better handled via new mechanics- my own spin was Powerplay operates on a trust value that if remains too low over a single tick ejects you from the power. But even then, that won't stop the person killing or robbing you outside the power, so you are back to those people who don't care / mind about Open and those who do.

 

[DemiserofD]

Extracted to emphasise this point - a CMDR's long term track record in dealings with other CMDRs is entirely lacking in-game. One would have thought that the Pilots' Federation would / should / could keep such records and use them to inform CMDRs when they encounter them (possibly by using a different colour and / or symbol on the scanner as one possible method)....

Funny you should mention that, I was writing a suggestion to do with that just as you wrote this!

It's really a brilliant idea, I'm surprised it doesn't exist already.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Funny you should mention that, I was writing a suggestion to do with that just as you wrote this!

It's really a brilliant idea, I'm surprised it doesn't exist already.

Such a ranking could, in conjunction with a few per-player settings, also be employed to influence which other CMDRs a player is instanced with.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Extracted to emphasise this point - a CMDR's long term track record in dealings with other CMDRs is entirely lacking in-game. One would have thought that the Pilots' Federation would / should / could keep such records and use them to inform CMDRs when they encounter them (possibly by using a different colour and / or symbol on the scanner as one possible method)....

Yes crime stat and notoriety are not persistent ones, I do think we should have more permanent reputation system. That would be in fact necessary if some truly co-operative gameplay features are to be added.

 

[DemiserofD]

The 'basic level' is that ED is not a talky MMO. Its decentalized opportunistic and ad hoc.

That has nothing to do with the difference between Open and Solo.

This difference between the two is incredibly basic; you can encounter new players there. That's literally it.

Which, with alts is negated. I like the idea of seeing criminality at 'the source' though (I've had similar ideas in the past)- although there its more about telling the difference between a pirate and those who simply like to kill. But even then this is only useful to people in open. It won't encourage people who don't like being pirated because they don't like being pirated in the first place.

Only if that alt is being used to kill members of their own Power, which, again, would quickly be dealt with by the other members of the Power.

Tying improved communications between players to Powerplay would, I expect, be ineffective for those players who don't want to paint a target on their back by pledging to a Power - given that some players will attack players of opposing Powers for no other reason.

I think this is a big part of the fundamental problem with Open. Being in a Power should offer more benefits than downsides, especially concerning having a community to play with. The whole point of joining groups is strength in numbers.

But because the current system makes it no easier to find allied players, while allowing enemy players to spot you instantly, it instead fills the exact opposite purpose of what it should be doing!

This is exactly why changes like these are so crucially important.

What you describe is incredibly rare though. 5C is the way it happens, not killing allies.

Then it should be fine. The biggest source of 5C is from unknown actors. By killing allied players, or by baiting them into traps, they quickly make themselves known and open themselves up to retaliation.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I think this is a big part of the fundamental problem with Open. Being in a Power should offer more benefits than downsides, especially concerning having a community to play with. The whole point of joining groups is strength in numbers.

All CMDRs are already members of the Pilots' Federation, i.e. that community comprises 100% of players; pledging to one of the eleven Powers reduces the size of the group of players in ones community to less than 100% of players.

 

[DemiserofD]

All CMDRs are already members of the Pilots' Federation, i.e. that community comprises 100% of players; pledging to one of the eleven Powers reduces the size of the group of players in ones community to less than 100% of players.

Well, sure. But in the same way, becoming part of a Gang reduces the group of humans in your community to less than 100%.

Still a net benefit, though, or people wouldn't do it.

As it currently stands, Powers are just a way to challenge yourself more, which, if it were to exist in real life, would certainly die out in short order.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Well, sure. But in the same way, becoming part of a Gang reduces the group of humans in your community to less than 100%.

Still a net benefit, though, or people wouldn't do it.

As it currently stands, Powers are just a way to challenge yourself more, which, if it were to exist in real life, would certainly die out in short order.

In which case a twelfth "unPower" (with zero effect on Powerplay) would reasonably be added for players who don't want to be forced to join a gang (where doing so paints a target on ones back) to benefit from improved comms.

 

[Rubbernuke]

That has nothing to do with the difference between Open and Solo.

This difference between the two is incredibly basic; you can encounter new players there. That's literally it.

It is, but all features are designed to be played as mute individuals. Talking is optional.

Only if that alt is being used to kill members of their own Power, which, again, would quickly be dealt with by the other members of the Power.

I'm talking at a more fundamental level outside of Powerplay. Piracy is dead because people view all pirates as killers, and don't trust anyone. No amount of talking will change that- so, what you want will benefit people in Open but IMO will not make Open play enticing to anyone else.

I think this is a big part of the fundamental problem with Open. Being in a Power should offer more benefits than downsides, especially concerning having a community to play with. The whole point of joining groups is strength in numbers.

But because the current system makes it no easier to find allied players, while allowing enemy players to spot you instantly, it instead fills the exact opposite purpose of what it should be doing!

This is exactly why changes like these are so crucially important.

For Powerplay people will use these tools and say "visit our Discord'. The other problem is that unless these tools offer advantages over Discord they won't be used. Your idea would have been great with Powerplays inception, whereas now its duplicating what exists. Powers won't be splitting time admining many different platforms, it will be the most flexible one that is used the most.

Then it should be fine. The biggest source of 5C is from unknown actors. By killing allied players, or by baiting them into traps, they quickly make themselves known and open themselves up to retaliation.

They don't need to do that, because if they are in Open (which they are not most of the time) its easy to spot them when numbers go up. No 5C player (unless its the oddball 5C 'RP' idiot) would be in open to begin with to talk to.

 

[Jmanis]

FWIW, I assume anyone is hostile until it proves itself otherwise. Blame years of NBSI flying.

The reason I don't fly in Open is the combination of lack of defensive fitting options and overall activity design that provide any reasonable option beyond "Fight" and "Abandon the activity".

The former, for any forseeable chance to win, needs a vessel fitted out exclusively for combat. The latter can be done, but because the pursued activities where players are present will generally be:

• a single point in space,
• flooded by people looking for easy kills
• with no real reward except for a bit of flavour in the galaxy's lore

Seriously. Why do I want to run a gauntlet of gankbears just to receive four audio logs? Same goes for any CG really. "Better comms" isn't going to fix that (albiet its a worthwhile suggestion), and well, PGs are already there to marry up with players you'll have more positive interactions with. Creating tools to marry up easier with people you'll have "positive" interactions with in Open is, well, just a potentially exploitative way to avoid the "negative" interactions.

Personally, I get enough interaction out of PMs and sharing information via system chat, from solo, already. It wouldn't incentivise open for me.

 

[CMDR Lukone]

I like OP suggestions for me or a veteran player but complicated mechanics have many problems with new players you are actually receiving from Epic.

Simple mechanics you can see in a login screen are much more useful for the purpose in my opinion.

Think in a new player, he is starting. A gazillion of new complicated things to learn.

He will go solo, and I would do the same if im in his shoes.

 

[RellTyr]

The fundamental draw of Open is playing with others. It's the only real difference between Open and Solo, so it's also the main selling point.

The trouble is that, at present, meeting new random players is largely biased towards aggression. If you see a new player, your initial response should ALWAYS be caution. This makes playing in Open simply too much trouble for players who don't enjoy random combat.

The key to solving this is to introduce more systems that let friendly players meet and cooperate, easily and intuitively.

1. Allow players to post wing missions publicly. For example, if you start a wing massacre mission, you can post it on your Powerplay faction's message board, and other members of your faction can go to the power tab and locate nearby missions that are available, join them, and go help complete them.

2. An ingame message board. Letting reputable members of the faction post twitter-like posts that are shared across the faction would help players know the best way to help their faction, or just find others with similar interests. For example, "Tomorrow at 1600, I will be jumping my FC, the Liar's Coinpurse, to the Coalsack Nebula to do some Thargoid Combat. Feel free to join me!" This system could be moderated by community vote of reputable members of the faction, reducing load on fdev.

3. Let players see long-term crime stats on other players. For example, seeing how many players someone has killed might help them to determine whether or not that person is safe to meet, or if they should run away. This could be done as simply as a separate ranking based on accrued bounties, perhaps going from "Upstanding Citizen" all the way to "Pirate Lord".

These sorts of features make Open more ...open. More welcoming, and more likely to get players in the door and experiencing the good multiplayer aspects that are this mode's primary selling point.

Sounds good to me, but perhaps the "hostile" galaxy is what Frontier wants? It's a lawless hive of scum and villainy for the most part by design.